DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM<br /> Civil Station, Palakkad – 678 001, Kerala<br /> Dated this the 20th day of November, 2007<br /> Present: Prof.O.Unnikrishnan, President I/C<br /> Mrs.K.P.Suma, Member<br /> <br /> C.C.No.30/2007<br /> <br /> Prof.C.Gopinathan Nair,<br /> C-18/27, Sai Sadan,<br /> Kunnathurmedu,<br /> Palakkad - Complainant <br /> <br /> Vs<br /> <br /> 1.The General Manager (Service),<br /> Indus Motors,<br /> M.G.Road,<br /> Cochin – 15.<br /> <br /> 2.The Manager,<br /> Indus Motors,<br /> 8/576, Chandranagar,<br /> Palakkad. - Opposite parties <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> By Mrs.K.P.Suma, Member<br /> <br /> The complainant is a registered owner of Maruti Alto KL9 Q3520 and has taken an Insurance Policy through Indus Maruti Insurance Scheme and the same falls due for renewal on 01/01/2007. The complainant submitted that on 07/12/06 he has approached the opposite party for renewal of the policy and requested for a certificate of insurance. Then the complainant was asked to make payment of Rs.5357/- towards insurance premium and he has handed over a cheque for Rs.5357/- immediately. Complainant submits that when he demanded for the receipt and Certificate of Insurance opposite party assured to give by registered post after clearing the cheque. He further submits that the cheque was encashed by the opposite party on 09/12/2006. Complainant alleges that after one week of clearing <br /> <br /> the cheque he contacted the opposite party and he was informed that the receipt and insurance certificate would be sent by the end of December, 2006. Since the complainant did not receive the said documents till 27/12/2006 he visited opposite party's office but the concerned person was not available on 27/12/06 and 28/12/06. Complainant submits that, besides the above, he again made visits to opposite party's office on 30/12/06 and 31/12/06 but it was a holiday. Further he visited opposite party on 1st, 2nd and 3rd January, 2007 by hiring a taxi but his efforts to get the Insurance Certificate were vain and he has suffered great mental agony. Complainant submits that he has suffered great inconvenience, mental agony by the irresponsible behaviour of the opposite parties. He further submits that on 3/01/07 he has received the Certificate of Insurance and he has acknowledged for the same. He has received the payment receipt on 05/01/07.<br /> <br /> Complainant alleges that Certificate of Insurance could have been delivered immediately after the receipt of the payment but it was delayed for about 25 days and thereby he has suffered great inconvenience, financial loss and this amounts to deficiency in service. Aggrieved by this the complainant caused notice to both the opposite parties but no reply has been received.<br /> <br /> Hence the complainant approached this forum seeking an order directing the opposite parties to Rs.3,000/- towards the financial loss sustained to the complainant for hiring taxi, Rs.100/- towards telephone charges, registered notices etc. and Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony suffered by the complainant and for deficiency in service committed by the opposite parties and such other reliefs as the forum decides to deem fit.<br /> <br /> Complaint was admitted and notice was served to the opposite parties for their appearance. Opposite parties entered appearance and filed version denying all the averments in the complaint except those which are specifically admitted.<br /> <br /> <br /> Opposite parties admit that the complainant has approached the opposite parties office on 07/12/06 and renewed the insurance policy on the same day itself. but due to complaint in the computer system they could not issue the policy. They submit that the renewed policy has been sent to the complainant on 8/12/06 by post and they were under the impression that the renewed policy was delivered to the complainant. Opposite parties submit that the allegation of complainant that there was a delay of 25 days is not correct and complainant has caused greater inconvenience and financial loss is wrong hence they denied. Opposite parties admit that complainant's insurance policy falls due for renewal on 01/01/07 and he approached the opposite parties' office for renewal on 07/12/06 and renewed on the same day itself. Further opposite parties admit that the opposite party encashed the cheque given by the complainant on 09/12/06. Opposite parties denied the allegation of the complainant that he has visited opposite party office on 28/12/06 and 30/12/06 and also denied the averment of the complainant that he undertook journey on 1st, 2nd and 3rd January, 2007. Opposite parties contented that the allegation of the complainant that after knowledge of the renewal of insurance policy of his car he had hired tax for his journey on 1, 2 and 3 of January 2007 is not correct and it is cooked fact with a malafide intention to claim and make wrongful gain from this opposite parties. Opposite parties averred that the complainant herein has approached this forum without clean hands to make illegal and wrongful financial gain from the opposite parties.<br /> <br /> Opposite parties submit that they are not liable to pay any amount as claimed in the complaint and the compensation claimed by the complainant is exorbitant and illegal. There was no cause of action against this opposite party. Hence this opposite parties prayed to accept their contention and to dismiss the complaint with compensatory costs to opposite parties.<br /> <br /> Complainant filed affidavit and Exts.A1 to A3 were marked on the side of complainant. Opposite parties filed questionnaire and complainant filed answers to <br /> <br /> the questionnaire.<br /> <br /> Heard the parties.<br /> <br /> There is no dispute that the complainant had handed over a cheque for Rs.5357/- towards renewal of the policy on 07/12/06 which falls due for renewal on 01/01/07. According to opposite party the cheque was encashed on 09/12/06. It is noticed from the Exts.A1(a) and A2 that the complainant had received the renewal policy document only on 03/01/07. The opposite party had not produced any evidence to substantiate their contention that the said document was sent by post to the complainant on 8th December, 2006. There is no ground to disbelieve the complainant that the policy documents was delivered to him only on 03/01/07 at 17.35 hrs by one Krishnakumar as per Ext.A1(a). We are of the view that the complainant could not ply his vehicle on 1st, 2nd and 3rd of January 2007. The delay caused in delivering the policy certificate by the opposite party amounts to deficiency of service on their part.<br /> <br /> The object of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is to compensate the consumer as to the actual loss or injury suffered by him due to the negligence on the part of the opposite party and not to compensate for an amount which may enrich the consumer unjustly and undeservedly. Hence the complaint is partly allowed.<br /> <br /> As a result of our above discussion, we direct the opposite party to pay an amount of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five hundred only) towards compensation for the mental agony suffered along with Rs.250/- (Rupees Two hundred and fifty only) as costs to the complainant with in one month from the date of communication of this order failing which the complainant is entitled to get 8% interest for the whole amount from the date of order till realisation.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Pronounced in the open court on this the 20th day of November, 2007 <br /> <br /> President I/C (Sd)<br /> <br /> Member (Sd)<br /> <br /> Forwarded/By Order, <br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> Senior Superintendent